• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Congress Shoots Down Hypersonic Plane

You think "radioactive" materials are required to make a nuke!!
:guffaw:

No - I think you need FISSIONABLE MATERIAL and you do, if you have found a way to make an atomic device without creating a chain reaction in weapons-grade Uranium or Plutonium a wealthy career planning the annihilation of Israel awaits you in Iran.

You can make a dirty bomb (possibly just as effective if you are terrorist) using waste material from hospitals, some elements used in radiography would be very dangerous if released over a wide area.

All that is required is a microwave maser beam tuned to the specific frequentia of the strong force.

I am not aware of that being a practical method of making a nuclear bomb without weapons-grade material involved.

For a low tech version, All you need is an oscillometer, and a well tuned microwave oven.

Cool, seeing as you know this - and I'm possibly being unfair in assuming from your general demeanour you are not a nuclear scientist (and probably not out of your teens) how come Israel is still there?
 
You've seen too many Hollywood movies.
okay. Actually i don't watch too many movies.
Academia is a chaotic environment, almost a perfect free market of ideas. Supression of knowledge has never, ever worked in the long run and it won't today. If I could re-invent physics with a microwave oven and $300 worth of spare parts, as you claim, I would want to be ahead of the curve, rather than behind it.
You seem to live in a different universe than I do. If i had some sort of credentials to offer, you might have some kind of point. Short of that,
In my experience, nobody wants to listen to an aspie autodidact, and
nobody really cares. Further more, they censor simple piddily things like the cost/benefit of geothermal power, the dangers of flouride, or useful means to obtain a waking theta condition. And this I know from direct experience
and making an effort. Given that, you expect me to believe that something so sensitive would ever be allowed to make it? I think you are not really in touch with how the world actually works. Its nice that it works as you say in theory, but thats not the world of reality.

Plus I will take from your posting times that you are a European, or at least live in time zones closer to those than mine in Wisconsin. I hate to tell you this but Dick Cheney doesn't know your name.
I live in Santa Barbara.
California.
So do I...so do I. :rolleyes: Impressive debut on the board, though. I will give you that.
Have you seen my "WARP" theory thread? I rather think of this as a much less interesting set of digressions.
Thanks tho, I appreciate the warmth.
 
No - I think you need FISSIONABLE MATERIAL and you do, if you have found a way to make an atomic device without creating a chain reaction in weapons-grade Uranium or Plutonium a wealthy career planning the annihilation of Israel awaits you in Iran.
There are a few problems with this. Firstly, My contention is that you do not
need radioactive materials in order to have a fission event. In fact, all matter is fissionable, the question is merely managing the holomorphics. I understand
that you are rightly skeptical, as are others, but this does not bother me
much, esp considering that the point is actually moot relative to the argument
at hand.

The second problem is, I"M ONE OF THE GOOD GUYS. So No matter how much money is waiting for me, I'm not going there and I'm not doing that.

You can make a dirty bomb (possibly just as effective if you are terrorist) using waste material from hospitals, some elements used in radiography would be very dangerous if released over a wide area.
Can we please actually just get back to the topic of why not to spend billions of dollars on a hypersonic plane? I'm never going to make any kind of bomb, period.

I am not aware of that being a practical method of making a nuclear bomb without weapons-grade material involved.
exactly right. You are not aware. the end.

Cool, seeing as you know this - and I'm possibly being unfair in assuming from your general demeanour you are not a nuclear scientist

whats my demeanor? I'm so curious? Technically, I'm a nuclear scientist. How would you like that specified? Detailed,
or mysterious?



(and probably not out of your teens
)
36. u? irrelevant. I had read thousands of textbooks by the time I was 19 and could have in theory done what i am describing back then.

how come Israel is still there?
The world of radical Islam is in short supply of aspies with 180 IQs.
 
I live in Santa Barbara.
California.
Beautiful city. As a native Californian, it's one of the few places in California that I could live in.

Impressive debut on the board, though. I will give you that.
Have you seen my "WARP" theory thread? I rather think of this as a much less interesting set of digressions.
Thanks tho, I appreciate the warmth.
I'll check it out.

And, prometheuspan, not every weird, outside the box, creative genius is neglected by academia. I'm sure you've heard of Garrett Lisi, a surfer dude who may have figured out the Holy Grail of physics, the Theory of Everything.

Telegraph UK article on Garrett Lisi

wonderful, long format New Yorker article on Garrett Lisi
 
I take exception to that, and I am insulted and offended by it. I remained
consistanly respectful of you and have not made any ad hominems against
you. Nothing I have said reveals anything more about me than that I am a geek. If in your opinion i am somewhat self aggrandizing and I'm faking an understanding of physics, that still does not mean that I pose any real threat to society.

Oh, it's not from your writing habits or level of politeness that I derive the idea that your mental attributes might mean jeopardy for your nation. It's just the rough concensus view that Asperger-like conditions tend to channel creative output in destructive ways, because of the lack of social inhibitors - and your creative output seems already geared towards destructive technologies and techniques.

It's certainly ad hominem, as I feel the homo in question was central to the subject matter of homemade mass destruction.

I stand by the Orson Scott Card plagiarism charges, however. ;)

Timo Saloniemi
 
file.php


Oh, it's not from your writing habits or level of politeness that I derive the idea that your mental attributes might mean jeopardy for your nation. It's just the rough concensus view that Asperger-like conditions tend to channel creative output in destructive ways, because of the lack of social inhibitors
There is no such consensus.


- and your creative output seems already geared towards destructive technologies and techniques.
From this one sample? You really don't have any place to judge me. I am highly creative and in the most positive ways.
It's certainly ad hominem, as I feel the homo in question was central to the subject matter of homemade mass destruction.
if thats your idea of an apology, its short.
I stand by the Orson Scott Card plagiarism charges, however. ;)
is he the guy who wrote enders whateva?

outpost4

his model is too busy. Subtract all but the most important lines.

that didn't work. Lets try smaller. I can only shrink it so much till the
detail is lost tho.

file.php


file.php







3ea94ca1-33eb-414a-a2e8-1b78d02be2f1
3ea94ca1-33eb-414a-a2e8-1b78d02be2f1
 
Last edited:
No one knows if/when peak oil has been/will be hit for quite some time. Popular Science ran an article a few years back that stated new discoveries would peter out around 2150.

Which is just blatantly dumb propaganda. If so, why is oil climbing in price
so fast?

Finding more is actually calculated into the formula here. Were it not, then we would be WAY past peak oil.

In any case, reaching these new oil fields is going to be much more costly than the ones we have already done, because they are generally either deeper or out in the ocean or both.

Given that on top of this theres global warming to worry about, the only sane option is geothermal and solar power, which we could transform over to for about the same price as "offshore" oil drilling proposals by republicans, but which would last forever instead of running out and which would be green rather than destroying the eco system and all life on earth as we know it.

--------------

http://www.ecofriend.org/entry/geot...-expensive-way-to-generate-clean-electricity/

http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2007/04/jefferson_teste.html

http://www.gordonmoyes.com/2007/01/10/crossbench-comment-better-than-nuclear/

http://www.answers.com/topic/geothermal-power?cat=technology

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/altarock-breaks-new-ground-with-geothermal-power-918.html

http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/17236/

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20080227/geothermal-cheap-abundant-cheap

http://www.altenergystocks.com/archives/2007/10/geothermal_the_other_base_load_power.html

http://peakenergy.blogspot.com/2008/05/engineered-geothermal-power.html

http://seekingalpha.com/article/76811-geothermal-energy-sources-101

http://www.smu.edu/geothermal/2004NAMap/2004NAmap.htm

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/geomap.html

http://geoheat.oit.edu/images/usmap1.gif

http://pesn.com/2007/01/22/9500449_MIT_Geothermal_Report/Geothermal_Map_USA_2004_hj70.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...t_map_US.png/800px-Geothermal_heat_map_US.png

http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/images/2008/01/18/geothermal_power_resouces_map.gif

http://www.utpb.edu/ceed/renewableenergy/texas_geothermal_1.jpg

http://images.google.com/imgres?img...firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=N

New Tectonic Source of Geothermal Energy?

volcan42.jpg Geochemists from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and Arizona State University have discovered a new tool for identifying potential geothermal energy resources. The discovery came from comparing helium isotopes in samples gathered from wells, springs, and vents across the northern Basin and Range of western North America. High helium ratios are common in volcanic regions. When the investigators found high ratios in places far from volcanism, they knew that hot fluids must be permeating Earth's inner layers by other means. The samples collected on the surface gave the researchers a window into the structure of the rocks far below, with no need to drill.

"A good geothermal energy source has three basic requirements: a high thermal gradient—which means accessible hot rock—plus a rechargeable reservoir fluid, usually water, and finally, deep permeable pathways for the fluid to circulate through the hot rock," says Mack Kennedy. "We believe we have found a way to map and quantify zones of permeability deep in the lower crust that result not from volcanic activity but from tectonic activity, the movement of pieces of the Earth's crust."

Geothermal is considered by many to be the best renewable energy source besides solar. Accessible geothermal energy in the United States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii, is estimated at 90 quadrillion kilowatt-hours, 3,000 times more than the country's total annual energy consumption. Determining helium ratios from surface measurements is a practical way to locate promising sources.

Julia Whitty is Mother Jones' environmental correspondent. You can read from her new book, The Fragile Edge, and other writings, here.
 
Apparently rampant speculation is to blame. So I hear, anyway.

propaganda lies and misinformation.

oil is skyrocketing because we are running out of it. Pure and simple.
Law of supply and demand. Economics 101. Super basic super simple.

Anything else is cracked up exxon/republican BS.
 
There are a few problems with this. Firstly, My contention is that you do not
need radioactive materials in order to have a fission event. In fact, all matter is fissionable, the question is merely managing the holomorphics.

What particular material would you recommend for your new kind of device, literally anything (Pizza, a Volkswagen, candy floss) or does your method still require something a bit more special?

I understand that you are rightly skeptical, as are others, but this does not bother me much, esp considering that the point is actually moot relative to the argument at hand.
Well it isn't personal, it is just I want to know what you are planning to blow up in your bomb if not uranium or plutonium.

The second problem is, I"M ONE OF THE GOOD GUYS. So No matter how much money is waiting for me, I'm not going there and I'm not doing that.
Well, good!

Can we please actually just get back to the topic of why not to spend billions of dollars on a hypersonic plane? I'm never going to make any kind of bomb, period.
OK - there is no military need to spend those billions, no commercial need, and there are no related commercial or military applications for the developed technologies.

exactly right. You are not aware. the end.
The board is not for discussion of our relative awareness, i will happily read your brief explanation of how my admittedly basic knowledge of the technology behind nuclear weapons is in fact wrong and you can make a bomb without a substance like uranium or plutonium.

whats my demeanor? I'm so curious? Technically, I'm a nuclear scientist. How would you like that specified? Detailed,
or mysterious?
You seem rather prickly and defensive - and if you are a nuclear scientist presenting a theory of how you can make a bomb with household goods, cool, please explain...

36. u? irrelevant. I had read thousands of textbooks by the time I was 19 and could have in theory done what i am describing back then.
I'm 27 and I apologise for the assumption. You do seem to be a bit OTT with the LOLZ though, dial it back a bit and I would not feel that way.

The world of radical Islam is in short supply of aspies with 180 IQs.
Fingers crossed you are right!
 
Apparently rampant speculation is to blame. So I hear, anyway.
propaganda lies and misinformation.

oil is skyrocketing because we are running out of it. Pure and simple.
Law of supply and demand. Economics 101. Super basic super simple.

Anything else is cracked up exxon/republican BS.

Prometheuspan, the price of oil is currently falling, and has been for many weeks; it's currently $92 a barrel. It peaked before summer because rampant speculation (as Lindley correctly pointed out) drove the prices up in the face of increased demand from both the projected use of U.S. citizens driving and flying to vacation destinations, and the growing industrial economy of China.
 
What particular material would you recommend for your new kind of device, literally anything (Pizza, a Volkswagen, candy floss) or does your method still require something a bit more special?
As i stated, the less complicated the atoms assorted strong bonds are, the easier it is to accomplish. "Special" in this case requires a mostly pure single element. Hydrogen, oxygen, and Helium all come to mind as the most likely candidates for a higher tech version, but water is probably the thing to settle
on for the low tech version because of its density and stability at room temperature.

Pizza, a volkswagon,, or candy floss obviously would not work.

This is not MY new kind of device and this technology was not invented nor designed by me. It was researched and fairly well documented by the mid 1980s by assorted atomic scientists.

Its still fairly easy to find older versions of the periodic table of the elements with the specific frequentia of the atomic force listed. You have to go to the library to do that, you won't find it on the net. This alone in and of itself should more or less prove the point. Why is the specific frequentia of the strong force no longer listed on periodic tables, and why has information previously available in bachelors level physics texts..(And still available in most libraries) been removed from the net?

The mechanism here is not mysterious, nor is it quacky or outlandish, its very simple. I didn't invent it, And its not even that smart of me to understand it. All I did was pay closer attention than most people did to
the basics recorded in earlier textbooks. The strong force is what holds an atom together. Create a standing wave which exactly matches that force and flatlines it, and the atom will drift apart.

There is no super criticality involved and there is no chain reaction. Some small fraction of the fuel element looses strong field cohesion, and the result is what science predicts it to be. This is fundamental ABC simple stuff.

Well it isn't personal, it is just I want to know what you are planning to blow up in your bomb if not uranium or plutonium.
I am absolutely not planning to blow up anything. I am telling you folks the simple reason why we should solve the worlds real problems before we go spending those trillions on batmanesque toys. Which is pretty big of me because I happen to favor batmanesque toys, and I design hypersonic jets and space planes. So if anybody should be pro hypersonic space plane, it should be me.
You seem rather prickly and defensive - and if you are a nuclear scientist presenting a theory of how you can make a bomb with household goods, cool, please explain...
I don't think I am prickly or defensive. I stated information which i found to be relative to the thread and was more or less personally attacked over it. Attacked people can be defensive. Prickly isn't me. If anything, a better description of my shadow would be that its big, dark, and brooding.

I'm 27 and I apologise for the assumption. You do seem to be a bit OTT with the LOLZ though, dial it back a bit and I would not feel that way.
I don't know what OTT is but i am guessing "over the top"? "Lolz" makes no sense to me in this context.
Its easy to be impatient with humanity when they don't listen, are so disagree-able, and when the factual history of my life is that history always tends to prove me right and everybody else whos arguing against me clueless.

My life consists by vast majority of interactions with humans which are pearls to swine interactions, and If i had a dime for every person i had argued with on the net whom history eventually proved i was right and they were wrong, I'd be rich by now.
Prometheuspan, the price of oil is currently falling, and has been for many weeks; it's currently $92 a barrel. It peaked before summer because rampant speculation (as Lindley correctly pointed out) drove the prices up in the face of increased demand from both the projected use of U.S. citizens driving and flying to vacation destinations, and the growing industrial economy of China.

As i said i think previously, the price of oil falling has everything to do with election season, and little to do with reality. Bush made a deal with the saudis to have oil prices drop in election season. This is one of those well established factoids i shouldn't have to repeat over and over and over again. The price of oil going up due to speculation is simply a cover story. The truth of the matter is that we have already hit peak oil. Prices over all will continue to climb, and this brief drop we are now seeing is nothing more than a manufactured drop to ease pressure
against the republicans.
 
Last edited:
Lindley don't buy the speculation story because Oil has Not been driven up just solely because of Speculators and to make them the sole scapegoat is unfair. This is is thing I hate about election year, all the bad stuff crawls out of the woodwork and you get posters claiming the most insane things. You get Democrats claiming to be the next saviors and saying how they are the next second coming of Jesus Christ and then you get Republicans claiming how the Bush life was so shiny and if their were bad problems its all because the Democrats won congress anyway. It's all lies, lies, followed by some mud slinging and more lies and more lies. Oil is up because of growth in India and China 20 years ago the Indian and Chinese man was living in extreme poverty, today these people are become players on the international stage and they want the great American lifestyle of fast food and fast cars. Oil is up because of US Dollar Weakness, at one time you could buy 1.20 Euro from the US dollar but today you would be lucky to strike 0.80 on the forex exchanges. Oil is up because of energy needs and we have not discovered new wells of that cheap black stuff. Oil is up because of Geo-Political Instability Bush looked good when the struck back at Afghanistan but Iraq has been a disaster, Hezbollah are getting more brave in their attacks against Israel and we have South American trouble as commodity rich Bolivia kicked out the US ambassador. Oil is up for many, many reasons. I realize it dropped a small percentage recently but that's because we are starting to dump our strategic fuel reserves on the open market(political BS move) and consumption will drop a little as thousands of Lehman Bros workers lose their jobs. Getting back on topic I can't really say I'm enthusiastic about a new hypersonic plane it looks like the USAF is trying to suck money from NASA and put it in the military. If they want to sell us a spade they should sell one and call it a spade not beguile the taxpayer with another wolf in sheep's clothing.
 
Lindley don't buy the speculation story because Oil has Not been driven up just solely because of Speculators and to make them the sole scapegoat is unfair.

Which does bring to light the point that speculation did have some impact..

This is is thing I hate about election year, all the bad stuff crawls out of the woodwork and you get posters claiming the most insane things. You get Democrats claiming to be the next saviors and saying how they are the next second coming of Jesus Christ and then you get Republicans claiming how the Bush life was so shiny and if their were bad problems its all because the Democrats won congress anyway. It's all lies, lies, followed by some mud slinging and more lies and more lies.

I agree


Oil is up because of growth in India and China 20 years ago the Indian and Chinese man was living in extreme poverty, today these people are become players on the international stage and they want the great American lifestyle of fast food and fast cars. Oil is up because of US Dollar Weakness, at one time you could buy 1.20 Euro from the US dollar but today you would be lucky to strike 0.80 on the forex exchanges. Oil is up because of energy needs and we have not discovered new wells of that cheap black stuff. Oil is up because of Geo-Political Instability

Also important contributing factors...

. I realize it dropped a small percentage recently but that's because we are starting to dump our strategic fuel reserves on the open market(political BS move) and consumption will drop a little as thousands of Lehman Bros workers lose their jobs.

important point.


Getting back on topic I can't really say I'm enthusiastic about a new hypersonic plane it looks like the USAF is trying to suck money from NASA and put it in the military. If they want to sell us a spade they should sell one and call it a spade not beguile the taxpayer with another wolf in sheep's clothing.

Thanks for taking us back to the topic.

I agree very much. I love the idea of hypersonic planes, but lets do that
in the right time and the right season for the right reasons and via the right agencies.
 
This is not MY new kind of device and this technology was not invented nor designed by me. It was researched and fairly well documented by the mid 1980s by assorted atomic scientists.

I meant yours in the context of the idea you are putting forward, not that you are its original creator - and it is a curious and interesting one.

Why is the specific frequentia of the strong force no longer listed on periodic tables, and why has information previously available in bachelors level physics texts..(And still available in most libraries) been removed from the net?

Well if the ideas in those texts were new and now (at least by the editors of such publications and websites) are considered either less interesting, debunked or wrong, or at least not relevant to their publications, then logically they can simplify their tables by removing them.

There is no reason to believe anything else, and I would class it as highly paranoid to assume a conspiracy, if that is what you are suggesting?

The mechanism here is not mysterious, nor is it quacky or outlandish, its very simple. I didn't invent it, And its not even that smart of me to understand it. All I did was pay closer attention than most people did to
the basics recorded in earlier textbooks. The strong force is what holds an atom together. Create a standing wave which exactly matches that force and flatlines it, and the atom will drift apart.

Is it possible developments in quantum physics in the last decade have rendered this method less likely to succeed?

Has anyone actually ever done this, even in a lab?


I am absolutely not planning to blow up anything. I am telling you folks the simple reason why we should solve the worlds real problems before we go spending those trillions on batmanesque toys. Which is pretty big of me because I happen to favor batmanesque toys, and I design hypersonic jets and space planes. So if anybody should be pro hypersonic space plane, it should be me.

Oh I agree with you completely on that part. I'm debating the bomb stuff with you.

I don't think I am prickly or defensive. I stated information which i found to be relative to the thread and was more or less personally attacked over it. Attacked people can be defensive. Prickly isn't me. If anything, a better description of my shadow would be that its big, dark, and brooding.

Hey cool - remember we are all here just to chat, nothing personal was meant, by me anyway!

My life consists by vast majority of interactions with humans which are pearls to swine interactions, and If i had a dime for every person i had argued with on the net whom history eventually proved i was right and they were wrong, I'd be rich by now.

Well errmm... OK - bit of a downer on humanity for a Star Trek fan though?

As i said i think previously, the price of oil falling has everything to do with election season, and little to do with reality. Bush made a deal with the saudis to have oil prices drop in election season. This is one of those well established factoids i shouldn't have to repeat over and over and over again. The price of oil going up due to speculation is simply a cover story. The truth of the matter is that we have already hit peak oil. Prices over all will continue to climb, and this brief drop we are now seeing is nothing more than a manufactured drop to ease pressure
against the republicans.

That is a bit paranoid - the drop we are seeing now is partly because of reduced speculation, 100% certain. Speculators and short-sellers have royally f**ked the world economy in the last year, and our bringing the banking system down on its arse.

I find it a lot easier to swallow the markets dropping as a solution to the current stabilisation of oil prices than a deal by Bush - what exactly is he giving the Saudis in return do you think? The Saudis and the other oil producing Arab countries don't give two hoots about the USA and STILL resent not being able to slaughter the Israelis in 1973.

If any political policy of the Republicans will stabilise oil future prices its drilling in Alaska, that would mean much less reliance in the USA on Middle Eastern oil.
 
Well if the ideas in those texts were new and now (at least by the editors of such publications and websites) are considered either less interesting, debunked or wrong, or at least not relevant to their publications, then logically they can simplify their tables by removing them.

There is no reason to believe anything else, and I would class it as highly paranoid to assume a conspiracy, if that is what you are suggesting?
I do not consider the USA government using censorship to keep us from being blown up a conspiracy, I consider it them doing their job. That is in fact what is going on, and, I find it hard to understand how anyone could fail to appreciate how that would and should work.
Is it possible developments in quantum physics in the last decade have rendered this method less likely to succeed?

Has anyone actually ever done this, even in a lab?
To the best of my knowledge, hundreds of times, esp at los alamos

Well errmm... OK - bit of a downer on humanity for a Star Trek fan though?
sorry.


That is a bit paranoid - the drop we are seeing now is partly because of reduced speculation, 100% certain. Speculators and short-sellers have royally f**ked the world economy in the last year, and our bringing the banking system down on its arse.
I don't doubt its a contributing factor, but its not as large a factor as simple manipulations of the market for political purposes. You think its paranoid?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4779686/
Results 1 - 10 of about 200,000 for bush deal cheap oil election saudis. (0.48 seconds)
Search Results


  1. CNN.com - White House, Saudis: No election deal on oil - Apr 19, 2004

    White House, Saudis: No election deal on oil ... The Bush administration did say it has received assurances from Saudi Arabia that oil prices will stay in ...
    www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/19/bush.oil/index.html - 46k - Cached - Similar pages
  2. CNN.com - Woodward, White House, Saudis: No election deal on oil ...

    Allegations of a secret deal with the Saudis brought President Bush ... Do you believe the Saudis would manipulate oil prices to influence the election? ...
    www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/20/bush.oil/index.html - 48k - Cached - Similar pages
    More results from www.cnn.com »
  3. Did Saudis assure Bush on oil prices? - Oil & energy- msnbc.com

    Saudi Arabia also does not interfere in elections,” Adel Al-Jubeir said. ... Oil slides below $97 on Ike's light damage toll · Bush: Ike put ’pinch’ on ...
    www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4779686/ - 56k - Cached - Similar pages
  4. Democracy Now! | Did Bush Cut Secret Oil Deal With Saudis Ahead of ...

    Did Bush Cut Secret Oil Deal With Saudis Ahead of 2004 Election? The White House and a top Saudi official are denying allegations that before the invasion ...
    www.democracynow.org/2004/4/20/did_bush_cut_secret_oil_deal - 45k - Cached - Similar pages
  5. <center>Does Bush have a “Secret Oil Deal” with the Saudis ...

    Does Bush have a “Secret Oil Deal” with the Saudis? ... supplies and prices in America are tied to the American election, tied to a secret White House deal, ...
    www.evangelicaloutpost.com/archives/2004/04/does-bush-have-a-secret-oil-deal-with-the-saudis.html - 52k - Cached - Similar pages
  6. Saudis: No Quid Pro Quo, Alleged White House Deal To Lower Oil ...

    Alleged White House Deal To Lower Oil Prices Pre-Election Denied ... Post journalist Bob Woodward said Bandar promised Bush that Saudi Arabia will lower oil ...
    www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/20/politics/main612741.shtml - 97k - Cached - Similar pages
  7. DEBKAfile - Bush Embarks on Saudi-Brokered Deal with Tehran

    The Saudi reporter went on to ask: "Is there a deal between the Bush administration and ... Still in crowing mode, Iran’s oil minister Gholam Hossein Nozari ...
    www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1321 - 26k - Cached - Similar pages
  8. THE 2004 CAMPAIGN: THE MASSACHUSETTS SENATOR; Kerry Accuses Bush ...

    ... Kerry Accuses Bush of 'Secret Deal' With Saudis on Oil ... to wait until the election, until November of 2004,'' for the Saudis to lower oil prices. ...
    query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C05EFD91E3BF933A15757C0A9629C8B63 - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
  9. Saudi-American Forum - Saudi knew of Bush war plans just hours ...

    Did the Saudi ambassador really cut a deal with the Bush administration to increase oil production in time for the presidential election? ...
    www.saudi-american-forum.org/Newsletters2004/SAF_Item_Of_Interest_2004_06_01.htm - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
  10. USATODAY.com - Kerry criticizes Bush on meeting with Saudi leader

    Bandar has denied any linkage between the election and a Saudi pledge to the Bush administration to push for lower oil prices. CBS's "60 Minutes" reported ...
    www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-04-22-kerry-saudi_x.htm - 58k - Cached - Similar pages




12345678910Next
Search within results | Language Tools

I find it a lot easier to swallow the markets dropping as a solution to the current stabilisation of oil prices than a deal by Bush - what exactly is he giving the Saudis in return do you think? The Saudis and the other oil producing Arab countries don't give two hoots about the USA and STILL resent not being able to slaughter the Israelis in 1973.
I just wish everybody else payed some kind of attention. No clue what hes offering. Probably willing to look the other way while they jack prices up and price gauge the rest of the time.

If any political policy of the Republicans will stabilise oil future prices its drilling in Alaska, that would mean much less reliance in the USA on Middle Eastern oil.
I find that to be unbearably difficult to describe without resorting to an ad hominem.
Edit. There are no political policies of the republicans that will stabilise oile prices. None. At all.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top